seattle should say no to raiding an existing nba team!!

[RainierBeachPoet]

there was a thought provoking article by art thiel the other day about what the future of nba hoops in seattle could be:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/thiel/370077_thiel09.html

bottom line: do we in seattle want to get a team back in seattle at the expense of another community's team? given the fact that the nba is not favoring expansion, the only other way to get a team back here in seattle is by an existing team moving here.

do we want to be robbers and raiders of the bucks/kings/grizzlies because their owner can get a sweeter deal here which would then essentially screw a different city from their team?

here is part of the article:


It's the NBA versus its fans.


Even though there is no one in pro basketball outside of Oklahoma and the commissioner's office who likes the uprooting of the Sonics to the prairie, the NBA has gotten away with it because ... it can.


As an unregulated monopoly that involves no public safety or utility interest, it can alienate whatever consumer segment it wants, knowing that the national market is big enough to find replacements.




unfortunately, the way the nba allowed bennett to leverage the situation for his own benefit (the move the OKC); there are no teams that are exempt from having a gun pointed to the community's head to give them what they want or else lose your team

after thinking about this the past couple of days (and at this place in my own "healing" process now that the sonics are gone), i agree with art that we ought not raid a team from another city


we, in seattle, ought to wait for expansion and
not raid an existing nba team


and in the meantime, it would be beneficial to everyone in the nba, to figure out some solid guidelines for arena funding. the real issue is: how much public money should go into an arena that primarily benefits the individual team owners? what are fair and just percentages for the revenue stream related to the arena?

[JordanL]

I think a pretty fair estimation is that:

1. Public funding must be recouped within 15 years.
2. The lease must be of a minimum duration so as to recoup the costs.

Any amount where the owner is comfortable signing a contract which meets the requirements is acceptable.

[Mathius]

Sorry RBP, your heart is in the right place, but your head is not. Expansion is hurting the league, and this wasn't the fault of the Sonics, or OKC for that matter, it was the fault of Clay Bennett, and the NBA's executives and owners for letting it happen.

There are teams in this league that are not cutting it, not making it financially, and those should have been the teams that went to OKC, not the Sonics.

Adding an expansion team just makes the league worse. The correct answer is moving one of the teams that aren't doing well into Seattle. I'm talking about the Grizzlies, the Hornets, the young teams whose cities are not supporting their franchises like David Stern predicted when the NBA first expanded there.

Mathius

[VCMVP1551]

The Sonics moving to Oklahoma City is a disgrace. The team looked to have a very bright future with Durant. They have one of the most exciting young players in the league and a great history of teams. Mutliple 60 win seasons in the 90's the 1979 championship, Gary Payton, Dennis Johnson, Jack Sikma, Shawn Kemp, Ray Allen ect.

A team with no tradition and no franchise player like the Grizzlies should be the team moving.

:roll: Those Mike Brown avatars are priceless Mathius.

[RainierBeachPoet]

Sorry RBP, your heart is in the right place, but your head is not. Expansion is hurting the league, and this wasn't the fault of the Sonics, or OKC for that matter, it was the fault of Clay Bennett, and the NBA's executives and owners for letting it happen.

There are teams in this league that are not cutting it, not making it financially, and those should have been the teams that went to OKC, not the Sonics.

Adding an expansion team just makes the league worse. The correct answer is moving one of the teams that aren't doing well into Seattle. I'm talking about the Grizzlies, the Hornets, the young teams whose cities are not supporting their franchises like David Stern predicted when the NBA first expanded there.

Mathius

i understand fully your perspective mtths and that is exactly why i think that seattle ought to take a principled stance. (hard to imagine in the nba and pro sports in general i know)

i know that expansion is not in the cards right now and the the dilution of talent has hurt the league overall

the nba execs ought to address this problem instead of just move the problems around.

if certain teams are not financially making it, they ought to outright lose the franchise and then close it down-- period. and THEN offer an "expansion"/new team in a better location (like seattle)

part of this conversation will be to talk about public and private money for pro teams and their venues

if things do not change from the NBA side, more communities will suffer in various ways because of greedy owners of ball clubs

[ForceOfNature]

You guys should take the LA Clippers. LA fans root for the Lakers anyway, I'm sure they won't be utterly disappointed. Go for it. What do you say?

[adamcz]

Please don't raid the Bucks!

Thanks!


You guys should take the LA Clippers. LA fans root for the Lakers anyway, I'm sure they won't be utterly disappointed. Go for it. What do you say?Raiding a team isn't fair to anyone, but if it has to be anyone, I agree Clippers are best. They still have a team in town.

[Sonic R]

Disclaimer:
•I don't mean any disrespect to the supporters and fans of the following NBA teams.

IF any teams are "worth" moving I think it would have to be:
Memphis Grizzlies
Los Angeles Clippers
New Orleans Hornets
possibly Atlanta Hawks?

Hear my cases:

Memphis Grizzlies—
Memphis Grizzlies owners are looking to sell? The team is in shambles. The Grizzlies history from its roots in Vancouver are that of loosing… their success is highlighted with a 0-12 playoff record! Memphis has strong support for their college teams which detracts from any formidable fan base the Grizzlies can establish.

Los Angeles Clippers—
The Clippers have always been in the shadow of the Lakers… :confusedshrug:


New Orleans Hornets—
This team struggled to fill their arena and currently have a bad TV deal. Would their even be fan support if Chris Paul did not have a MVP season? How will the team and fans fare should their be a decline in success in the following seasons? New Orleans is also a football town which fans have very strong support going towards BOTH the Dallas Cowboys and the home team Saints… There is reason to believe that the Hornets were entertaining an opportunity to move but have not for reasons of political correctness… Cant move the team from a devastated city now!

Atlanta Hawks—
I don't think the Hawks should really leave Atlanta even though the lack of fan support says otherwise. It just seems for years that the Hawks have struggled to develop a fan base and the organization has struggled for the better part of - well they've struggled pretty much since being in Atlanta :confusedshrug:
I really don't know the situation in Atlanta, their support for their teams and such. The Falcons seem to struggle with fan support at times too and thats a NFL franchise (aka goldmine for Art Blank). Either way I doubt the Hawks will or should do anything to leave the city of Atlanta.

Again I don't mean to upset any fans and supporters of the preceding teams. I've made my post from the perspective of an outsider.

ALSO
I am in full agreement that expansion is not the answer. The league already has enough teams and at 30 teams, everything is split evenly — 2 conferences at 15 per conference, 6 divisions at 5 per division with 3 divisions per conference.

NO to expansion.
Move the Clippers out of LA!

[Kblaze8855]

I think Oklahoma will be a great great fanbase if the team is at all good. They were hyped for the Hornets the few games I saw there. Not saying the Sonics arent...when the team is good the Sonics have great fans.

[JordanL]

I think Oklahoma will be a great great fanbase if the team is at all good. They were hyped for the Hornets the few games I saw there. Not saying the Sonics arent...when the team is good the Sonics have great fans.

The Sonics have great fans when the team isn't good, Kblaze.

[Mathius]

i understand fully your perspective mtths and that is exactly why i think that seattle ought to take a principled stance. (hard to imagine in the nba and pro sports in general i know)

i know that expansion is not in the cards right now and the the dilution of talent has hurt the league overall

the nba execs ought to address this problem instead of just move the problems around.

if certain teams are not financially making it, they ought to outright lose the franchise and then close it down-- period. and THEN offer an "expansion"/new team in a better location (like seattle)

part of this conversation will be to talk about public and private money for pro teams and their venues

if things do not change from the NBA side, more communities will suffer in various ways because of greedy owners of ball clubs

Hrm. So you basically want to disolve the teams that aren't getting enough financial fan i.e. fan support and then go back and award an expansion team to Seattle?

It won't ever happen. I'm guessing your of the opinion that if a team is disolved, rather than moved, it is less of a feeling of rejection to the fans who watch their favorite hometown players move?

It's far more involved to do it that way, it'll never happen. And what happens to the players who are on the teams that are disolved. Do we do one big draft and get rid of all the teams at once? Do they become free agents? What about the talented players on poor teams, like Chris Paul and David West, who are making pretty good dough? If all these guys become free agents, teams aren't going to have money to throw at them. They have to take a big pay cut. Do their contracts just transfer over then? Making them free agents doesn't work in the scenario. There isn't enough free money in the entire league to spread out 40 mil (and that's just a rough figure, since every team is at least at 52mil except maybe the Griz, of course every player wouldn't get signed)

Mathius

[RainierBeachPoet]

I think Oklahoma will be a great great fanbase if the team is at all good. They were hyped for the Hornets the few games I saw there. Not saying the Sonics arent...when the team is good the Sonics have great fans.

just about all city's will be less animated about their team when they are losing and the borderline fans come out when it is a playoff team

OKC's judgement wont be the first few years while they are a novelty, but down the road when the "honeymoon" wears off

[RainierBeachPoet]

Hrm. So you basically want to disolve the teams that aren't getting enough financial fan i.e. fan support and then go back and award an expansion team to Seattle?

It won't ever happen. I'm guessing your of the opinion that if a team is disolved, rather than moved, it is less of a feeling of rejection to the fans who watch their favorite hometown players move?

It's far more involved to do it that way, it'll never happen. And what happens to the players who are on the teams that are disolved. Do we do one big draft and get rid of all the teams at once? Do they become free agents? What about the talented players on poor teams, like Chris Paul and David West, who are making pretty good dough? If all these guys become free agents, teams aren't going to have money to throw at them. They have to take a big pay cut. Do their contracts just transfer over then? Making them free agents doesn't work in the scenario. There isn't enough free money in the entire league to spread out 40 mil (and that's just a rough figure, since every team is at least at 52mil except maybe the Griz, of course every player wouldn't get signed)

Mathius

i hadnt thought out the details of this spur of the moment idea-- those could always be worked out. but you are right Mthus, it will never happen that way

i was just thinking of a way to stay at thirty teams but not raid an existing team

i guess the principle for me is:

we, in seattle had our team raided

i dont want to do that to another city just to get a team back

[RainierBeachPoet]

[quote=Sonic R]Disclaimer:

[crounsa810]

I say if any team should move, its the Grizzlies. Let's face it, they don't have as great of a history as every other team. Plus, if the team were to move there, that would involve getting rid of the name. Grizzlies, they dont have a history. Clippers do, Bucks do, Hornets do, Hawks do, so pretty much memphis is the only one left out. I dont want to see any other team lose their name, except Grizzlies. Maybe a name change will do them good lol.

[Kblaze8855]

The Sonics have great fans when the team isn't good, Kblaze.

Perhaps...but I dont see them on tv.When the Sonics had Ray they were just absurd that one 50+ win year. Like a notch below the Warriors fans. Once they fell off id see a game there and...nothing. By last year they had like the worst attendance in the league. I understand that fans were caring less with the team likely to move...but still. I also know they didnt technically have the worst attendance but it was worse than the numbers. The city counted all seats sold...the ownership counted the seats actually filled when the game was played. Very different things.

[iamgine]

I'm just thinking, if 2 teams can exist in a city, why not get 2 major cities for 1 team.

Not suggesting anything but for example, Portland Trailblazers move nearer to Seattle and get their name to Portland & Seattle Superblazers or something. 2 major cities from 2 different states joined up into 1 team, that would be epic. They will get more fanbase. Will that work at all?

[StroShow4]

Portland & Seattle Superblazers

:oldlol:

the superblazers, i like it.

[Y2Gezee]

I would hate for there to EVER be another expansion team... it waters down the league.

There is a lot of unhappiness about the Seattle situation because they actually did have pretty good fans, and a rather successful history. But if a team like Memphis/Atlanta or something like that without much history nor a great fanbase ends up moving, then fine.

[Vancouver-Grizz]

I hope the Grizz goes to Seattle.... I am still Pi$$ed that they left Vancouver. Atleast if they are in Seattle, I can drive there and watch them. F*CK Heisley and his sneaky intentions!!!

[DoubleTech]

grizz or the clipps seem like the best choices...

and yea, a big NO to expansion, we don't need to water down the talent in the NBA.

[final.wrath]

just start rooting for portland, the nba has no intention of getting a team back to seattle anyways.

[RainierBeachPoet]

Perhaps...but I dont see them on tv.When the Sonics had Ray they were just absurd that one 50+ win year. Like a notch below the Warriors fans. Once they fell off id see a game there and...nothing. By last year they had like the worst attendance in the league. I understand that fans were caring less with the team likely to move...but still. I also know they didnt technically have the worst attendance but it was worse than the numbers. The city counted all seats sold...the ownership counted the seats actually filled when the game was played. Very different things.

tv is just about ratings-- ratings follow the nba personalities


the actual/sold distinction is important but...

memphis and indy had worse total averages than we did

but minnesota charlotte and philly (plus memphis and indy) had less percentage attendance in terms of capacity

of course, many of us were soured on the team because bennett et al did blow it up in order to show lack of fan interest which strengthed their case

[RainierBeachPoet]

I'm just thinking, if 2 teams can exist in a city, why not get 2 major cities for 1 team.

Not suggesting anything but for example, Portland Trailblazers move nearer to Seattle and get their name to Portland & Seattle Superblazers or something. 2 major cities from 2 different states joined up into 1 team, that would be epic. They will get more fanbase. Will that work at all?

kansas city and omaha shared the kings before!!

superblazers huh...

paul allen are you reading?

[RainierBeachPoet]

I hope the Grizz goes to Seattle.... I am still Pi$$ed that they left Vancouver. Atleast if they are in Seattle, I can drive there and watch them. F*CK Heisley and his sneaky intentions!!!

i really liked having vancover, seattle and portland in the league at the same time

it was too bad that he moved the team-- too bad there wasnt ish back then

[Ballstar1982]

Sorry RBP, your heart is in the right place, but your head is not. Expansion is hurting the league, and this wasn't the fault of the Sonics, or OKC for that matter, it was the fault of Clay Bennett, and the NBA's executives and owners for letting it happen.

There are teams in this league that are not cutting it, not making it financially, and those should have been the teams that went to OKC, not the Sonics.

Adding an expansion team just makes the league worse. The correct answer is moving one of the teams that aren't doing well into Seattle. I'm talking about the Grizzlies, the Hornets, the young teams whose cities are not supporting their franchises like David Stern predicted when the NBA first expanded there.

Mathius

I think those that throw the New Orleans Hornets into the discussion for a possible move are foolish. I believe that as long as they have Chris Paul then they will be a viable franchise. If you saw this past years playoffs, it is clear that they will continue to build support as that city recovers.

My opinion is this, i cannot see the former Seattle team lasting very long in OKC, not a major sports city if you ask me.

[RainierBeachPoet]

I think those that throw the New Orleans Hornets into the discussion for a possible move are foolish. I believe that as long as they have Chris Paul then they will be a viable franchise. If you saw this past years playoffs, it is clear that they will continue to build support as that city recovers.

My opinion is this, i cannot see the former Seattle team lasting very long in OKC, not a major sports city if you ask me.

chris paul can be traded...

part of the sinister plot of moving the sonics was:

trade ray allen
do not resign rashard

in order to alienate the fans

we lost almost 50 points a game with these moves and
went on to win 20 games--- the worst in sonic history

[BlazersDozen]

Seattle will have another team by 2013!

No reason for expansion!

If there is no team in Seattle by 2013 then Clay Bennett will have to pay Seattle an additional 30 million dollars. David Stern won't let that happen to his good buddy and Clay Bennett doesn't want it to happen because with the money he gives up, he could've used to pay for the majority of the new arena that he wanted.

[RainierBeachPoet]

Seattle will have another team by 2013!

No reason for expansion!

If there is no team in Seattle by 2013 then Clay Bennett will have to pay Seattle an additional 30 million dollars. David Stern won't let that happen to his good buddy and Clay Bennett doesn't want it to happen because with the money he gives up, he could've used to pay for the majority of the new arena that he wanted.

i hope you are right!

as for me, i dont think it will motivate clay to go to extraordinary measure on seattle's behalf

i think he and the other owners wont mind writing it off as a business expense in the end...

man-- i hope i a wrong though

[BlazersDozen]

Well $30 million doesn't seem much by itself for a billionaire, but coupled with the $75 million he already payed...thats $105 million just to move the team.

[kentatm]

ill say this to OKC fans who are being jerks to Seattle fans right now

you just stole a team with 40 years of history in the same town.

how easy do you think it will be to move your stolen team away if CB decides he isnt making the money he thought?

answer

PRETTY F-ING EASY



this is just pathetic all the way around.

MSG where the Knicks play is no better than Key Arena. Its a big piece of garbage too. however we all know the NBA would NEVER allow the Knicks to move just b/c they were not happy about how much money they could bilk taxpayers out of for a new arena.

[Mathius]

I think those that throw the New Orleans Hornets into the discussion for a possible move are foolish. I believe that as long as they have Chris Paul then they will be a viable franchise. If you saw this past years playoffs, it is clear that they will continue to build support as that city recovers.

My opinion is this, i cannot see the former Seattle team lasting very long in OKC, not a major sports city if you ask me.

From what I heard, NO's attendance was still poor until after the all star break when it became apparent how good this team is.

The true mark of a team is how good their attendance is when the team is mediocre, or on the bubble, not when they're on the top of their game. Then all the fair weather fans come out.

Seattle had to deal with a noncontender for 10 years.

Mathius

[mlh1981]

From what I heard, NO's attendance was still poor until after the all star break when it became apparent how good this team is.

The true mark of a team is how good their attendance is when the team is mediocre, or on the bubble, not when they're on the top of their game. Then all the fair weather fans come out.

Seattle had to deal with a noncontender for 10 years.

Mathius

eek. That sounds like the Cavs :eek:

[RainierBeachPoet]

Well $30 million doesn't seem much by itself for a billionaire, but coupled with the $75 million he already payed...thats $105 million just to move the team.

i believe that it was $45 mil up front

and $30 mil in five years (if there's no team)

(possible) $75 mil total